The Importance of Primaries

The results of election night 2009 are a cause for great celebration for both the Republican Party and more importantly the cause of limited government conservatism. At the same time, the night’s most significant blemish, the loss of Doug Hoffman in the 23rd congressional district of New York, demonstrates an important fact. Primaries matter.
 
When President Obama named John McHugh Secretary of the Army, vacating the congressional seat in NY – 23, the response of the Republican Party establishment in New York was a disaster. Party officials chose as a candidate, Dede Scozofazza, who was not only at odds with nearly every principle of limited government conservatism, but who was also a terrible candidate and, as demonstrated by her eventual endorsement of the Democrat in the race, had little allegiance to the Republican Party.
 
Vigorous primaries are an important part of our political process. First they prevent the fielding of candidates with poor communications skills. Second they ensure that the standard bearer of a political party actually represents the views and beliefs of those individuals who will be the candidate’s core supporters in the far more contentious general election. Finally, and most importantly, they confer a sense of legitimacy that even should an individual’s preferred candidate lose, that loss is the result of a deliberative and competitive process.
 
Primaries should not be contentious or pyrrhic affairs. As Republicans we should neither seek to damage each other’s reputations ahead of elections against our true opponents, the Democratic Party candidate, or force each other to waste resources better spent on such contests. But every candidate must be willing to demonstrate that they will be the most effective standard bearer for the GOP and ultimately in governing in a manner which will best serve all their constituents.
 
This is why I have repeatedly invited my primary opponent Frank Guinta to debate, in friendly gatherings of Republicans across the state, the issues that are important to our party and to the future direction of our country. We must demonstrate both our ability to articulate a vision that goes beyond parroting talking points of the national party and demonstrate why we are uniquely qualified to make decisions which will affect the lives of every American within and outside New Hampshire.
 
Whether Frank or I go on to face Carol Shea-Porter in the general election, we will likely be heavily outspent by national Democratic Party committees. But as demonstrated by the defeat of John Corzine in New Jersey, even great financial disparity cannot overcome the ideal message delivered by the best messenger. Republicans in New Hampshire must have the opportunity to make an informed choice on the message they wish to deliver and on the messenger to deliver it.